5,466
edits
Minhast/Noun Incorporation: Difference between revisions
m
Fixed typo
m (Fixed typo) |
|||
| (3 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown) | |||
| Line 7: | Line 7: | ||
# Type I - Lexical Compounding: the creation of new lexical items by compounding a noun root and verb root; | # Type I - Lexical Compounding: the creation of new lexical items by compounding a noun root and verb root; | ||
# Type II - Case Manipulation: a noun (usually a Patient, although Instrumental and Locative nouns may be involved) is incorporated into the verb complex. This is a valence operation: if the incorporated noun was originally a core argument, another argument can occupy the position vacated by the IN and assume core status. Alternatively, depending on the semantic nature of the verb, Oblique8 nouns that are Instruments, Locatives, or Goals may also be incorporated;9 | # Type II - Case Manipulation: a noun (usually a Patient, although Instrumental and Locative nouns may be involved) is incorporated into the verb complex. This is a valence operation: if the incorporated noun was originally a core argument, another argument can occupy the position vacated by the IN and assume core status. Alternatively, depending on the semantic nature of the verb, Oblique8 nouns that are Instruments, Locatives, or Goals may also be incorporated;9 | ||
# Type III - Manipulation of Discourse: NI is used to | # Type III - Manipulation of Discourse: NI is used to background information in sections of the discourse so that other arguments are brought to the foreground. It allows speech participants to focus on the important entities within a particular passage of the discourse; | ||
# Type IV - Classificatory NI: Mithun describes this type of NI wherein a “...relatively general N(oun) stem is incorporated to narrow the scope of the V(erb)...but the compound noun stem can be accompanied by a more specific external NP which identifies the argument implied by the IN.” | # Type IV - Classificatory NI: Mithun describes this type of NI wherein a “...relatively general N(oun) stem is incorporated to narrow the scope of the V(erb)...but the compound noun stem can be accompanied by a more specific external NP which identifies the argument implied by the IN.” | ||
| Line 488: | Line 488: | ||
| IPA = | | IPA = | ||
| morphemes = purrak saxt-raħk-tahal-ruppamak-ek-ar-an | | morphemes = purrak saxt-raħk-tahal-ruppamak-ek-ar-an | ||
| gloss = pigment=ABL | | gloss = pigment=ABS INCH-APPL.ABL-be.green-face-1S.NOM-PST-INTR | ||
| translation = My face became green from the dye (lit. "Because of the pigment, I became green-faced.") | | translation = My face became green from the dye (lit. "Because of the pigment, I became green-faced.") | ||
}} | }} | ||
| Line 543: | Line 543: | ||
| gloss = stand.upright-storm.cloud-PST-INTR | | gloss = stand.upright-storm.cloud-PST-INTR | ||
| translation = The storm clouds hung (over us) (lit. "The storm clouds stood upright") | | translation = The storm clouds hung (over us) (lit. "The storm clouds stood upright") | ||
}} | |||
Interestingly, ''-puht-'' can license agreement with other nouns, such as ''kayyūn'' "tree", when a collective meaning is intended: | |||
{{Gloss | |||
|phrase = Yaššapuħtakayyummaharan. | |||
| IPA = | |||
| morphemes = yašša-puħt-kayyūn-mah-ar-an | |||
| gloss = there.DIST-stand.upright-tree-3S.NEUT-PST-INTR | |||
| translation = The trees stood there. | |||
}} | }} | ||
Diachronic factors may explain the irregularities involving agreement marking for a subset of incorporated nouns interacting with a subset of verbs. The Proto-Nahenic ancestor originally had an extensive hierarchical noun class system, remnants of which remain in Minhast's relative Nahónda as evidenced by even more irregularities in the latter, and in its other relative Nankôre, whose elaborate nominal hierarchy may be a preservation of the protolanguage's original noun class system or an extensive elaboration of it. The irregular agreement marking triggered by ''-iyuššit-'' among a subset of a select class of verbs suggests that the noun once fell within a noun class of a particular animacy level. When the protolanguage split, the original noun class system were restructured in the daughter languages; further reductions and loss, particularly in both Minhast and Nahónda, left a residue in the form of the irregular agreement marking seen today. | Diachronic factors may explain the irregularities involving agreement marking for a subset of incorporated nouns interacting with a subset of verbs. The Proto-Nahenic ancestor originally had an extensive hierarchical noun class system, remnants of which remain in Minhast's relative Nahónda as evidenced by even more irregularities in the latter, and in its other relative Nankôre, whose elaborate nominal hierarchy may be a preservation of the protolanguage's original noun class system or an extensive elaboration of it. The irregular agreement marking triggered by ''-iyuššit-'' among a subset of a select class of verbs suggests that the noun once fell within a noun class of a particular animacy level. When the protolanguage split, the original noun class system were restructured in the daughter languages; further reductions and loss, particularly in both Minhast and Nahónda, left a residue in the form of the irregular agreement marking seen today. | ||